LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 



LFORCE cbLLEOTiON.j J 

t UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, t 




OavvvCv\ J/v<vw<a^ Uh/yy^^in^ A 




.IIR. SirilTH'S REVIEIV 

of the ^^ Letter oj Leonard Jarvis, to his Constituents oj 
the Hancock and Washington Districtj4prMaine,*' 




The pamphlet of Mr. Jarvis, to which Is^te the roader's 
eonsideration, is designed to divert public attention from cer- 
tain disreputable and mean actions committed by him, which I 
have been constrained to expose to the world, in consequence 
of his continued attacks upon myself and my political relation- 
ships, throuorh the newspaper channels of his District. 

It was anticipated by me that he would become uneasy under 
my exposure of him: But I foresaw very distinctly, what his 
course has subsequently verified ; that his restlessness under 
the guilt and conviction of conduct which every honorable man 
must despise, would only result in the developeinent of still 
other proofs of his true character, such as must sink him still 
lower in public estimation. Such is the natural tendency of 
base motives, the world over. They betray the man who vields 
to tliem, at the very moment, and in the very operations, which 
induce him to place the strongest reliance for success upon 
their cunning. Innocence, or conduct proceeding from hio-h 
and honorable impulses, or from conscious rectitude, incurs no 
such danger. He who hopes to gain a permanent advantage 
over him who has either of these upon his side, by acts of irn- 
tation, or the language of obloquy, knows little of the power of 
either innocence, honorable impulses or conscious rectitude 
but will prove his own worst enemy in every struggle. Truly 
fcas it been said, ^'thrice is he arrri'd, who hath his quarrel just " 
In my exposure of Mr. Jarvis to his constituents, the follow- 
ing facts were established, and so incontrovertibly that he is 
compelled, in his pamphlet, to admit them, and bend all his ef- 
forts to palliate them — viz. 

I'st. That in disregard of every principle of honor and hon- 
esty, he detained, and read a "confidential" letter written by 
myself to the Hon. John Anderson, then Member of Congress 
knowing at the time, that the letter had been handed to him' 
through mislake by Mr. Anderson, and in the stead of a letter 
from Judge Ware, which was not confiderttial. The letter thus 
pillaged by Mr. Jarvis was marked "confidential" at its com- 
inencement, and had no allusion whatever to the subject upon 
which Judge Ware's letter was intended to have been shown 
him. But not content with indulging to this extent his dishon- 
orable propensities, he soon afterwards reported to Judge Preble 
his version of the letter that he had so rifled, in orderlto widen 



/:.. 24(> 



the existinor differences between Judge Preble and myself, and? 
therein wliolly misrepresented the letter. 

2dly. That'at a subsequent dat«, viz. in January or February- 
last, he purloined from the files of the P. O; Department in 
Washington City, against the known ruifes of the Department, 
a copy, or the substance, of another letter from Gov. Dunlap to 
myself, relating to the then proposed removal of Mr. Miichell, 
the Postmaster at Portland^ Me., one of the devoted partisans 
of Judge Preble. This letter, too, was marked ^'cov/idcniial" at 
its commencement on the inside — and again marked '^confi- 
denliaV^ upon its outside by tlie Assistant P. M-. General, Air. 
HoBBiE, and was accompanied by. an envelope relating thereto 
and restricting the use of it, which' was also marked "j^maie" 
at its commencement on the inside, and ''■conJidtntiaV^ upon ita- 
outside by Mr. Hoebis. And having thus surreptitiously ab- 
stracted the contents of this letter, he forthwith reported them 
to individuals in the Maine Legislature, to be privately used in 
misrepresenting and injuring me, supposing that it would lead 
to dissensions between Gov. Dunlap and myself. 

After detecting these vile intrigues in Mr. J^arvis, and pos- 
sessing myself of incontrovertible evidences of his guilt, I 
deemed' it due to myself and my friends to exact of him an ex- 
jdanation, which should either lead to better treatment in future, 
or satisfy him that I understood right well the vile uses he was 
capable of, and to which he was willing to prostitute himself, in 
serving the purposes of Judge Preble and the members of Judge 
Preble's faction, who had arrayed themselves against the gen- 
eral policy of the Republican Party in Maine. 

Tarious were the shifts, and ridiculous the devices to which 
Mr. Jarvis resorted, to evade, on the one hand a justification of 
his piratical conduct towards the confidential letters 1 have de- 
scribed, and on the other hand, to steer clear of making a full 
confession of his baseness and asking to have it forgiven and 
forgotten. Want of leisure ! — a dislike to the language in which 
7ny°complaints had been conveyed to him'— an apprehension that 
"THE INTERESTS &F Maine" ivould s^ifftr—the arrival of one of 
my letters to him en the Sabbath— his ivillingncss ^'to he vpon 
terms of courtesy with his colleagues'''' and ^'to maintain a good 
understanding with them Ahi.^''-~the supposition that I wished 
to provoke a quarrel with him—were the pretences successively 
put forth by him, to save himself from each branch of the disa- 
greeable alternative to which my detection of his vile intriguei 
against me pinioned him. I: adhered with corresponding vigi- 
lance to my determination not to be thus drawn off upon col- 
lateral issiies fiom the main subjects at issue, and parried his 
pretences as they were successively put forth, until he could 
no longer resist the confession that his conduct had beea of a. 



character wlv.cb was incapaWe of any explanation ! To use 
his own words, my **first note could not produce any explana- 
tion, but migbt orig'inate an angry discussion." (Ste his letter 
efl4th March, in mi/ former pamphlet.) Tiiis was abandoning- 
all pretence taa justification of Ins conduct, and of course aban- 
doning the first branch of the alternative presented to him. 
But instead of adoj)4.ing the other, and the only proper course 
for a man thu.3 smitten by detection and conviction in acts of 
singular baseness, aad thereu-pon resolving to make amends and 
to "sin no more;" he preferred to yield to the obstinacy and 
desperation of wounded vanity and pride, and to inform me that 
I should "fi:nd Mr. Jarvis ready to give me personal satisfac- 
tion whenever I should think proper to call for it !" 

What a humiliating commentary of condemnation is that 
man — who has had his birth, liis education and his home in 
New England — made to furnish upon his own, conduct, when 
driven to confess that the blind ordeal of a duel can alone en- 
able him to escape the stigma of his conduct towards another 
individual! Who among the "constituents" of Mr. Jarvis 
could feel like an innocent, an honest, or an honorable man — I 
mean honorable in our New England acceptation of the word, 
if he had been brought to such a straightened condition, on 
being forced to look back upon his own conduct towards anoth- 
©F, and inwardly upon his own hearf? 

My correspondence with him last winter, as published in the 
exposure which I have made of him, furnishes all the above 
cited facts in detail. 

Turning now to his pamphlet,. I will begin with exposing 
A FRAUD which he has practised in it upon his- readers and upon 
the public, in his ardor to detract from myself, of a character 
hardly less calculated to excite the indignation of all honest 
men against him, than are his spoliations committed upon pri- 
vate and confidential correspondence, and his pilfering from 
the files of the P: O. Department. In bis pamphlet, Mr. Jarvis 
lias published an extract of a letter from Hon. C. C. Camere- 
L.ENG, member of Congress from N. York, and another extract 
cf a letter from Hon. J. M. Wayne, recently member of Con- 
gress from Georgia, and now a Judgip of the Supreme Court of 
the U. States. The knavish manner in which he presents and 
makes use of these extract?, inevitably impresses the Fnind of 
every reader with the belief, that the honorable writers of thera 
had knowledge of his intentions in procuring them — that the 
writers of them understood perfectly the differences between Mr, 
Jarvis and myself— thai they had seen my letter to Bntcs^ in 
which my opinion of Jarvis is expressed — and \\\^ithey intended' 
to take sides with Jarvis. To all these conclusions, he ha* 
stttdio-usly aimed in liis pam,phlet to bring the minds of his "cqc.-- 



stitncnts" to whom it is nddrtv-sed, and the mind of every 
rerifler of it. Nor does it disclose a circumstance, or word, or 
syllable, to excite a suspicion that such is not altog-etl)er a true 
imDression respectitii^ Alessrs. Cambreleng and Wayne. But 
on the instant of seeing his pamphlet, I knew a most base fraud 
had been practised in this use of these gentlemen's names and 
influence. Had I not, however, previously delected and ex- 
posed him in his low intrigues to serve the Preble faction 
auainst myself — delected and exposed him in obtaining- by 
stealth, and afterwards retailing' in perverted versions, the con- 
t;^nts of one letter which he saw was "confidential"; and in 
practisin::]f the same vile triek in relation to another letter of a 
similar cunracter, and violating in addition thereto a known rule 
of one oftlie Departments of the Government, wliich allowed 
iiim access to its files only npon the supposition that he was a 
rrian of sufficient honor to observe positive injunctions at least, 
1 should have hesitated in crediting, to even the extent of sus- 
picion against him, the possibility of his guilt in a fraud 

UPON HIS OWN PEOPLE AND CONSTITUENTS, SUch aS his USe of 

t!;p "extracts" alluded to brought instantly to the light of my 
own mind, on seeing his pnmphlet. The following correspond- 
ence between the same Mr. Cambreleng- and myself, will at 
once tell the story. 

"House OF Representatives,"^ 
Washington City, Jan. 10, 1835. § 

UoTf. C. C. CAMBREI.F.NG, 

Dear Sir : In a pamphlet over the signature of Leonard Jarvis, 
which hasjust been received by n)e, I find vvhrit purports to be an 
e."Ttractof a letterfrom you, under date of the Slh uli. in which yoa 
speak of "u malevolent attack" made upon iVlr. Jarvis'a political 
character. 

The use thus made of the extract of your letter, gives its denun- 
eiation an application to a letter which [ had previously written to 
one Batei^, in which Mr. .larvis was mentioned, and implies that you 
Vi'ere aware oTthe history and character of my letter to Bates, aiwl 
refjardod it as "a malevolent attack" upon Mr. Jarvis. 

In justice !o mjself, which in this case involves justice to your own 
intentions also, I beg to be informed, whether at the time of writing 
tyonr letter for Mr. .Tarvis, ^ou had been furnished with, or had seen 
a copy of my before n.uned letter to Cates, to which Mr. Jarvis in 
his pamphlet tnalces an application of your letter, or knew the nature 
pf the existing differences between Mr. Jarvis and myself, and intend- 
«d to expre.ssany opinion thereupon .' 

'■ I am fully persuaded, thot the impressions under which your letter 
•wis written !ire not truly represented in the application which has 
buen made ofitjso far as I am implicated by it; but as others are now 
iaierested in knowing the truth of the nr'itter, be good enough to ac- 
coinpanv your reply with a pern>iss:on to use it in such manner as 



will not be iiicoiisisletit with what is duo to all parties. An early re- 
ply is desired. I have i!i« honor to be, 

with sentiments ot" sincere 

esleen), your obd't. serv't. 

FilAiNClS O. J. SMITH." 

"Washington, lOih Jan. 1S35. 

Dear Sir : In answer to your note of this uiortiing, I have tfiG 
pleasure to state, that when I wrote the letter to JMr. Jarvis to which 
you refer, I had not been furnished with, nor had 1 seen, the origi- 
nal, or a copy of jour letter to Mr. Dates. IS'eiiher had I, at tiiat 
time, any knowledge wliaiever^of the existence of a controversy be- 
tween Sir. Jarvis and yourself. 

Iain very respectfully, 

your obd't servn't. 

lion. F. O. .1. Smith. C. C CAMBRELENG." 

So iiiuch for the fraud practised with the letter and namo 
of Mr. Cambrelenrr, by Mr. Jarvis. I addressed at the same 
time as above, a similar letter to Judge Wayne. The Ibllowing 
is an extract from his reply. 

"VVhen I wrote the letter to Mr. Jarvis, to which you allude in 
your letter to nieof to day, I did Jiot know who w-is the writer of the 
letter to a paragraph of which Mr. Jarvis called my aliention, nor 
did I know that there was any difTeieuce between you. I have nev- 
er seen the entire letter." "A copy of his letter to nie is at your 
service, if you wish it, and I will give to him a copy ofyours to me if 
he shall ask it. By so doing I shall act impartially between you, 
without making mystlf any way a party in your controversy, with 
which 1 have liad no concern, and with the merit.<5 of which 1 asn still 
unacquainted. I am, dear sir, respectfully, 

3 our obd't. sersn't. 

JAMES M. WAYXE. 

To the Hon. F. O.J.Smith." 

l(, after reading*- thi.s additional proof of the j)rincipies and 
motives that ijovern Mr. Jarvis, not only in his condnct towards 
myself, but in his doalin*^ with his own "constituents," they, or 
any other class of readers shall tiiink that I imputed to him 
qualities which had not then so notoriously characterized him, 
in pronouncing- him ''at JVashino-ton the 7nost unpopular ani 
despised man in the ranks of the administration parlij,''^ they will 
ut least allow that I did not greatly run ahead of his fann) and 
(lesiiny, nor mi.sjnd^e (he elements of which he is cornponnded. 
WMio but a man wholly unworthy of political confjd' nee. could 
Jiave been guilty of violaiinj::, as has been shown, lh«^ confiden- 
tial correspondence of others, and of abstractinir it. like a ihUj] 
from the files of the P. O. Department, while it bore the writ- 
ten marks of " Confidential," made by that deparUM^nt, also, 
upon its front, to put every one upon his guard. Would iiotL 



such a man as readily, and with as little compunction of feel- 
ing, break the seal of your leilers, to serve his purposes ? These 
acts do not make him a different man from what he was before 
their commission. But they illustrate to the world, what sort 
of man he was before, and novv is, and must be regarded in l\i- 
luro, by all honest men. 

What other man, than one of the character in which Mr. Jar- 
vis has been exposed, would have obtained (by steallh, also, as 
it were,) wherewith to convey fraudulent impressions against 
another, certificates of character from members of Congress, 
disposed to befriend him; and afterwards so use those certifi- 
cates, as to make the writers appear like partisans in his own 
controversy, about the merits of which he had neither furnish- 
ed them, nor had they the means of any knowledge lohatever? 
What oiher man, would have thus assigned a false and unauthor- 
ized position to individuals, who, were willing to lend Jiim a prop- 
ping hand in the extremity of his own need? — and have made 
them appear to take sides, and to pronounce opinions, and utter 
denunciations, in a controversy whose very existence teas U7i- 
knoimi to them? — and this, too, to mislead and abuse the judir- 
nients, and prejudice the minds, of his 0Wx\ people and con- 
stituents! But this is the new aspect in which Mr. Jarvis's 
pamphlet has enabled me to exhibit his character. It is the 
same character which was capable of filching and violating the 
private and confidential correspondence that did not concern 
him at all ; only the view had of it now is had through another 
lattice, which has been loosened from its jilace by hi'* restless- 
ness under the first exposure that 1 made of his destitution of 
honor and principle. 

But I invite the reader to glance at Mr. Jarvis's defence of 
himself First, in relation to the P. O. Letter. He premises, 
that 1 was determined to effect Mr. Mitchell's removal from the 
P. Office in Portland; and then proceeds — 

"So eager was he to accomplish his purpose, that he communica- 
ted to the Post Office Department a letter from Gov. Dunlap, of the 
most confidential nature — a letter that was intended for no mortal 
eye, but that of Smith. This letter I myself saw upon the files of the 
P. O. Deparlnjejit, exposed to the gaze of every member of Congress, 
c*cc. I lost no lime in communicating the fact to Mr. Shepley, in order 
that he might use his influence with Smith to have the letter with- 
drawn. * * * If in addition to the information given to Mr. Shep- 
i(?y, I had also imparted the fact to a friend, in the Legislature of 
Maine, or had even warned Governor Dunlap himself of the violation, 
on the pnrt, of his correspondent of what among men of honor has 
always been deemed most sacred, I ask you, with what propriety 
could Mr. Smith charge me with having done aught that I had not the 
liiost perfect right to do ? A letter ceases to be confidential wheu 



printed, sr otherwise made public, and I certainly should have been 
justified in taking either or botli of the courses to which I have al- 
luded." 

Thus, as I remarked in the onset, the attempt of Mr. Jarvis is 
not to deny the acts charged upon him, but to palliate their 
baseness. And how well founded is his palliation ? It rests 
entirely upon ihe assumed ground, that Gov. Dunlap's letter 
was made public on being lodged in the P. O. Department — 
aj)d that "a letter ceases to be coniidential when printed, or 
otherwise made public, and he certainly would have been justi- 
fied in taking either* or both of the courses to which he had al- 
luded." 

Now does not every reader li^re convict Mr. Jarvis again of 
dishonesty, in tepresenting the letter as made public at the time 
he saw it? Made ^u6/ic, while it was enveloped by a wrapper, 
marked upon the outside ^^ Confidential,''^ by the Assistant Post- 
master General himself! and marked inside '-pnyaie ?" Made 
^iihlic, wiien the outside of the letter itself was in the same 
manner marked by the Assistant Post Master General, '■^Con- 
/idenlial,'" and on the insitte marked again ^'■ConfidmlialV^ — 
Mr. Jarvis has not had the effrontery to deny that they were 
t'hus strongly marked, for he knows the originals all still exist 
as described. But, notwithstanding all these precautions, and 
notwithstanding Mr. Jarvis himself describes the letter as "a 
htttr of the most coujidential character,''^ and notwithstandiug he 
was prohibited j'rom taking a copy of it by the known rules of 
the Department, he attempts to justify his examination of the 
letter, and his promwlgatio^i of its contents, by considermg it as 
made public from its being, (he affects not to know how) in the 
possession of the P. O. Department! Did ever a detected cul- 
prit strain his ingenuity harder for a palliation of his roguery? 
Are Mr. Jarvis's constituents so stupid and reasonless as to swal- 
I-ow contentedly such an exposition of their Representative's 
code of honor, honesty and fair dealing? It is not to be credit- 
c-d by any body. 

But there is another attempt at imposition in the above state- 
ment of his case, by Mr. .larvis. Ho aims at creating the im- 
pression, that he was solicitous only to have the letter with- 
drawn. Why then write to a friend in the Maine Legislature 
a copy, or the whole substance, of the letter? Ah, this he 
seeks again to explain, by representing that he was solicitous to 
warn Gov. Dunlap himself of the violation, on the part of his 
correspondent, &c." IJut to effect only this Jast end, a copij^ 
WOT a summary of the violated letter, surely, need not have 
been sent. The fact is, this is all a false tale made up by Mr. 
Jarvis to meet his necessity, and to relieve himself of his detect- 
ed knavery towarde both Gov.. D> and myself. And, as luck 



8 

will have it, T am enabled to prove it falsk, that he wrote 
"to a friend in the^Leg•islatlJre of Maine," with a view of having 
Gov. Dunlap ^^ warned of the violation, &c." Charles Jarvis, 
the brother of Leonard, is the "friend" to whom he wrote. This 
Charles Jarvis, since my first expose of Leonard, and with a 
precipitancy which made him forget how much cunninfj concert 
Leonard's situation required to relieve him, published /n'* state- 
ment of the matter, and that "lets the cat out of the bagr." 
Leonard must " keep cool" if I take one of his own brothers to 
prove the falsity of his pamphlet. In his statement, Charles 
denies that Leonard's letter authorized him to make the fact 
known to the Governor, that his "confidential" letter to my- 
self was exposed, and how much more does it deny, that it re- 
quested him so to inform the Governor! Mere it is, as I found 
it addressed by him to myself, through the columns of the ^u- 
gusla J]ge : — 

"Ellsworth, Dec. 11, 1834. 
Me, me, adsum qui feci: in me convertite ferrum. 

Sir :— I have learnt, by your publication of tiie VVashington cor- 
respondence between you and Leonard Jarvis, which has been wide- 
ly circulated in the eighth Congressional District, that you couniplain 
of his having communicated to some eastern friends a summary of a 
confidential letter from Gov. Dunlap to you, which he saw exposed 
on the files of the Post Office Dep;irtnient. If any wrong has been 
committed, as the only one justly chargeable I feel bound to avow my 
share iri the transaction, having confidence thai the pablic will duly 
appreciate my motive. 

The fact of the exposure of the confidential letter of Gov. Dunlap 
to you, vvns coirinoutiicated to me in m private letter from Washington. 
I mentioned it t,o a member of the Council and at his request furn- 
ished him with an extract to hand to ihe Governor. Unauthorized, 
on my own resjumsihility, without waiting to confer with the 
writer, snd obtnining his leave, if leave would have been granted, I 
felt it was n)y duty lo place Governor Dunlap on his gaasd against 
one, who had shown that in the attainment of an object, he was so 
little scrupulous as to the means. Your Ob't ^erv't, 

CHARLES JARYLS. 

Hon. F. 0. J. Smith.'' 

Thus Charles, and not Leonard Jarvis, is the original claim- 
ant of the merit of feeling- the necessity of putting- Gov. Dun- 
lap on his guard! How admirably characterized by truth and 
fair dealing is .my assailant's pamphlet throughout I He seeks 
to rob even his own brother of a boasted merit, lo supply the 
deficiency in his own stock ! 

In relation to the letter to Mr. Anderson, he thus attempts to 
palliate his conduct — not controverting in one single point lb© 
accuracy of my account of his course— ' 



" The letter in question I have reason to believe was shown t© m». 
tiirough mistake ; but I became acquainted witli its contents before 1 
knew it was not intended for my perusal. The ouly question that 
remains is, whether having thus without itipropriety, on my part, 
become accquainted with the contents of the letter, 1 was bound to 
keep them pecret ? * * * I was not requested to keep this infor- 
mation secret by the person who had placed the letter in my bands, 
&c. If, however, any person had reason to complain, it was the 
gentleman through whom the information was obtained," Jlr. An- 
derson. 

Such is his exposition of himself. And does it not betray a 
species of dishonesty at heart which few men would nurture, 
that pretended any respect for honorable intercourse with men ? 
I ask every one who feels an interest to read this controversy, 
to analyze in his own mind the principles of action thus avow- 
ed. The first position is, that even though a man obtains the 
contents of a conJidenUal letter hy mistake, he is not bound 
thereafter to respect that letter, or its contents, as confideniiall 
Tiie second is, that if one by mistake communicates to another 
a confidential letter from a third person, it is the duty of the first 
to request the second to keep the information thus disclosed se- 
cret, or he is at liberty to make what use of it he pleasesj Tiie 
third is, that in either of the supposed cases, if the person thus 
possessed of a confidential letter hy mistake makes use of ils 
contents to tiie prejudice of the writer of the letter, the writer 
of it has no reason to complain of it, or hold the guilty one ac- 
countable, but it is the exclusive privilege of tiie one to whom 
it was written to do so ! Such is Leonard Jarvis's code of 
honor and honesty, promulgated by himself! Could such absurd 
and piratical principles ever have found an advocate in any man 
li^iflg, if he had the slightest cliance of defending himself, by 
recognizing principles more just and consistent with fair deal- 
ing .= Is not tlie avowal of such principles of pallialiun and de- 
fence of his conduct, in all respects tanlamount to an admission, 
that his conduct to be palliated and defended has been tliat of a 
base, unprincipled man? 

But mark still further tiie odious inconsistency of the man. 
When my confidential letter to Mr. Anderson fell into Mr, 
Jarvis's hands, and its contents were violated by him, Mr. An- 
derson, the recipient of it, was the only person to complain 
rightfully of its abusp. I, the writer of it, could have no rigiit 
to complain of it. When Mr. Duniap's confidential letter [o 
me fell into the same hands, Mr. Jarvis's, and its contents were 
violated by him in a like manner, Mr. Dunlap, the writer of it, 
and not myself <7/.e recipient of it, was the right person to be in- 
tormed of it at once by this same honorable Mr. Jarvis, and Iho 
person having the most aggravating cause of complaint! 



10 

The dishonesty and duplicity of Jarvis stands out upon every 
page of his pamphlet, almost as distinctly as does his nose upoa 
jiis face. It is needless for me to pursue them, after what has 
been already elicited of his character. At one time he repre- 
sents Mr. Anderson, what he truly is, frank, cordial, indepen- 
dent, and free from intrigue^ but afterwards imputes to him, by 
direct implication, a connivance with me, in confidential corres- 
pondence, at plans to destroy the influence of men every way 
my superiors. If Mr. J, would have his constituents to believe, 
that my letter to Mr. Anderson was such as made it the duty of 
Mr. J. to promulgate its contents at once to the members of the 
Preble faction, in what light would he make Mr. Anderson ap- 
pear, whose studious silence both then and ever since upon the 
pubject of that letter to these men, Jarvis does not controvert ? 
The honor and safety of every body in Maine, against my in- 
trigues and plans of destruction, appear most strangely to have 
depended upon Mr. Jarvis's sense of duty at every turn! The 
fact is, the letter to Mr. Anderson contained no sentiment of 
either hostility or reproach towards any human being on earth, 
and he will so inform every applicant to him upon the subject. 
Jarvis wholly falsified its contents in his story to Mr. Preble. 
The latter, on hearing from th<? same lips the despicable man- 
ner in which he saw the letter at all, should have told Jarvis at 
once tliat he had behaved like a knave in ever speaking ofiht 
idler again to any one, and his version of the letter should at 
once have been suspected by Mr. Preble. 

But I proceed to notice one other feature of his defence. He 
appeals for proof ot his political fidelity to his votes in Congress. 
Let the reader try him by this test on votes of a strictly party 
cliaracter. It is well known that but very few questions arise 
in Congress, in which a political party can feel so deep and 
sensitive interest, as in those relating to the support of. or op- 
posilion to, their Presiding Officer. These are strictly ques- 
tions upon which every political man is expected to do his duty. 
Here parties divide with more precision than at any other 
time, unless there be gross impropriety on the part of the pre- 
siding officer. On the 18th of February, 1834, such a question 
arose in the House of Representatives; and from its history 
the sensitiveness of the opposition may readily be inferred. I 
qtiote it from the journals of the Hous€, p. 341. 

*'The House then resumed the consideration of the motion made 
" by Mr. Polk on the 17th December, that the report of the Secretary 
** of the Treasury, iii relation to the removal of the deposits of the 
" public funds from the Bank of the United States and its branches, 
'' to certain State Banki!, be referred to the commhtee of Ways and 
^' Weans. 



11 

" The question recurred on the instructions moved by Mr. McDuflie 
'* on the same day, and on ihe amendnrtent to said instructions, moved 
" by Mr. Jones of Georgia, on the 14lh of January. And, afier fur- 
" ther debate, the previous question was n)oved by Mr. ftluhlenberg. 
•* And before it was ascertained whether the previous question was, or 
*' was not, demanded by a majority of the members present, a call of 
'* the House was moved by Mr. Chilton. The^peaker [Mr. Stevenson] 
*' decided that after the previous question was moved, and before it 
•' was ascertained whether there was a second to the motion, (which, 
" by the rules of the House, required a majority of the njcinbers pres- 
" ent) it was not in order to entertain a motion for a call of the House." 

" From this decision Mr. Chilton [opposition] took an appeal to 
'* the House; and, after debate, Mr. Chilton withdrew his appeal. 
*' Mr. Adams [opposition] renewed the appeal, and after I'urilier de- 
" bate, withdrew it. The appeal was then renewed by Mr, Foster," 
[opposition.] 

" And the question was put, shall the decision of the Speaker stand 
•*' as the judgment of the House ? 

*' And passed in the affirmative, yeas, 115, nays 112." 

Was not the foregoing- a case of "real necessity !" for Mr. 
J^rvis's support of his party .'' How did he vote.' Against his 
party — aj^ainst every one of his colleagues, not excepting those 
whom he has procured to vouch for his uniform political fidelity I 
Against Messrs Hali, Parks, Mason, Kavanagh, Mclntire, and 
myself; and against Mr. C. C. Cambreleng t.>o ! What have I 
said of him? That "he was too odd and offish ever to be de- 
pended upon in case of real ntcessityy Is not here proof of it ? 

Look at another instance in which ail the sensibilities of the 
republican party in Conirress were involved. On the 28th of 
June, see Journal of the House, p. 870 : — 

*' !Mr. Richard M. Johnson moved that the rules prescribing the 
" order of business be suspended for the purpose of enabling him to 
*' move the following resolution, viz: 

" Resolved, That the thanks of this House be presented to the 
*' honorable Andrew Stevenson, late Speaker, for the firmness, dig- 
*' nity, skill and impartiality with which he Oiled the office of Speak- 
" er during the present session." 

" And on the question, will the House suspend the rules for the 
" purpose aforesaid, there appeared yeas 89, najs 49." 

Here again was a case of "real necessity," — two thirds be- 
ing required to suspend the rule. Every parly vote was put 
in requisition. But how did Mr. Jarvis vote ? ./Jgninst his parly ) 
Yes, against his colleagues whose certificates of party fidelity 
he has procured ! viz. Messrs. [Parks, absent] Kavanay^h and 
Mclntire. Also, against Messrs. Hall, Mason, and myself. 
And Mr. C. C. Cambreleng, too— Mr. JVapie being absent. 

Afterwards, on the same day, when the question of passing 
the foregoing resolution came up, the vote stood, ayes 97, noes 



]2 

49. And a^ain did Mr. Jsrvis vote against lii^ parry, and h\s 
colleagues, including those who have certified tor him, and 
ngainsl Mr. Cambreleng ! Messrs. Hall, Kavanagh, Mason, Mc- 
Iiitire, Parks and Smith — Mr. Wayne beng still absent. 

On tlie 22d of March, on two several questions of considering 
appropriations for carrying on the extensive and expensive 
Cumberland road through Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, and for 
erecting a bridge across the Potomac, he voted against each of 
his colleagues [tresent, viz. Messrs. Kavanagh^Mason^McIntire, 
Parks and Smith. 

Oil the '^-Sd of April, Mr. John Q,. Adams (opposition) propo- 
sed to amend the journal of tlie House, whereby to impugn a 
decision of the presiding officer made on the day previous ; — 
which motion Mr. Boon (administration) moved to lie on tiie 
table ; whereupon the ayes and noes were ordered, and Mr. B's 
motion was lost by a vote of 94 to 95. This was a strictly 
party question, and a case of " real necessity," a change of Mr. 
J's vote onlv being wanted to turn the scale! Where again 
was Mr. Jarvis's vote given? Against his party, and against all 
liis colleagues who were present on the occasion, including 
th-'jse who have certified for his uniform, fideliiy ! viz. against 
Messrs. Hall, Kavanagh, Mason, Mclntire, and Parks. And 
against Mr. CaiahreUng too, though with Mr. Wayne. See 
House Journal, p. 556. 

I might go on with this enumeration until the subject should 
cease to be of interest to the reader, and until this review hud 
swollen into a volume. But is it necessary ? The facts cited— 
the record exhibited, must be enough to satisfy any mind, that 
I spoke not " without book," and not wholly from reckless iios- 
tility, when 1 described Mr. Jarvis as not to be depended upon, 
"tn case of real necessity,''^ by his party. In giving certificates 
of general good conduct, men may be carried away by motives 
of friendship, sympathy, pity or vague and general impressions. 
The same men, when called upon to testify under a sense of 
responsibility that would induce them to scrutinize the comhict 
of the man imploring their interposition, would shrink from the 
undertakino- to stand as props to him. But what is the weight 
of any man's impressions, against rf.cordkd votes, which can- 
not lie, respecting tiie conduct of the voter.' Nothing. 1 
properly appreciate and respect the motives of that portion of 
my colleagues, who have lent themselves to npliold Mr. Jarvis. 
In Maine their motives will generally be appreciated rightly. 
But something more than even their certificates are wanted to 
break doivn the testimony of a large number of Mr.Jarvis's own 
votes, which are directly at war with their certificates. Even 
Mr. Wayne is careful to qualify his letter to Mr. Jarvis, as fol- 
lows — " / believe you have the respect and confidence of the party. 
as you certainly iiave mine." Faint praise this, at best. 



13 

How does Mr. Jarvis seek to avoid tho cliarq-e of being- "the 
tuppliant tool of the Ware faction?" He chooses to inuler- 
stand by this, an aliiision to " Gen. Chandler, J(idge Prebie, 
Judge VVare, and Mr. Mitchell." And then adda— " I am glad 
of this public opportiuiity to declare myself their friend. 1 
have known them long and intimately, and I know theni to be 
men of higii character and UMblemished reputation, of whom 
tlie democratic party may be proud." After thus eulogizing, 
those whom he recognizes as the Ware faction, he puts in the 
certificates of Messrs. Mclntire, Parks and Kavanagh, that he, 
Jarviti, labored in denouncing the course which these gentle- 
men "of whom the democratic party may be proud" have 
been pursuing ! And the certificate of Mr. Shepley, that it \* 
"impossible that you (Jarvis) can be the suppliant tool of any 
man or set of men." 

Now without questioning at all the motives of my certifying 
colleagues Ijere, more than where they certify for Mr. JarvisV 
fidcliiy in voting, I do here, as there, come down to iiiconiro- 
vertilde^ facts, and oppose these as the foundation and confirm- 
ation of my declaration, that Jarvis has been the suppliant tool 
of the Hare faction on all occasions. I rest uiy case upon 
KACTS. Mr. Jarvis rests his upon certificates. The public will 
judge which are worth most, in a case of character. Wijat but 
the suppliant tool of the Ware faction did Jarvis show himself 
to be, in improving the earliest opportunity to communicate to 
Judge Preble, one of the heads of that faction, a version of the 
letter which ho, Jarvis, confesses that Mr. Anderson handed 
him through mistake, and which was expressly confidential ? 
What but the suppliant tool of the Ware Jaction did Jarvis 
show himself to be subsequently, in first prying into papers 
marked confidential, by both the writers of them and by the As- 
sistant Postmaster General; and in afterwards purloining a 
copy, or summary thereof, and communicating it forthwith for 
the benefit of "the faction," who were then notoriously striving 
t-o sustain Mitchell, one of their number, in the Post Office at 
Portland, against the known policy and interests of the repub- 
lican party throughout the State.' Could a tool be more obe- 
dient to the interests of its masters, or perform offiees more 
servile and base than these ? Such facts prove more than a 
thousand general certificates could do, of the character and re- 
lationships of a man. When Jarvis can getaway from these 
facta, bis certificates may be of use t® him. But while ihey 
remain incontrovertible, certificates of character will on\j 
prove what the writers of them are disposed to do, and what 
they cannot nevertheless do, towards making him the man he 
ought to be* ''n public estimation. 

Mr. Jarvio affects to fin^l fault that I addressed him a letter 



u 

after his intimation that he was ready, if I would invite him, ta 
settle our differences, by a duel! Whatever might have been 
the proper course to Jiave been adopted towards a mau who 
liad not himself pursued the correspiondence beyond the point 
wliere I closed with his own proposition to let it rest, with him 
who had adopted a different course, I felt justified in doing as f 
did. By recurring to our correspondence, it will be seen that in 
his first reply to me he declined making any explanation ; and 
in acknowledging the recei[)t of that reply, I closed with the 
remark, that if he considered the reasons which he had given 
for thus declining, "a sufficient protection of his own character, 
&c." / was content to rest there the discussio7i lehich he declined, 
and to abide by the contingencif. Instead, however, of risking 
the subject to rest there, he re-opened the correspondence,, and 
shuffled from one apology to another, under the new pursuit of 
him, which I then commenced ; and the right then belonged to 
me to place all my n^otives and views t>f our relationi«hip in black 
and white before him. As for his corning up to the mark of a 
duellist, I was sure it was all bravado-, and nothing more with, 
him. For the man who has thfi reputation of having been pub- 
licly cow-skinned in the streets of Paris,, as Mr. Jarvis has, for 
some of the mean actions of his. younger years, from want of 
courage, previously, to answer his antagonist like a man ofhon- 
er, (as Air. Jarvis would noio say!) and without resentment 
enough, afterwards, to avenge himself in any vvay,,can scarcely 
claim to lecture myself, or any other man,, for any slight disre- 
gard of the supposed requirements of the duellis4,'s code. Even 
since I have comn>enced writing this paragraph, Mr. Jarvis has 
given new evidence of his pusiJlanimity,.and disgraced the State 
he represents upon the floor of the House of Representatives, 
by first eliciting a personal altercation with a member from, 
another State, and afterwards meanly retreating under the lasli 
of the latter, by taking hack and explaining away the provoca- 
tion which he himself had offered-, but had not the courage t(^ 
follow up.* 

He speaks of my personal acquaintance with him, and would; 
create the impression that I had sought his. The second time 
I ever met him was at Brunswick, in November 1834, when he 
was on his way to Washington. We reached the stage office 
from opposite directions at about the same time in the evening.. 
After tea, and as I was about to leave the house to visit a friend, 
he approached and requested to accompany me to that same 
friend's house. [ could not well avoid the ofTer, and we went 
together. But as soon as it could be done, decently, I relieved 
jHys«lf and friend of him, by proposing a return to the stage 

*I allude to what transpired between Mr. Pallor, of Virgiuia, and Mr., 
Jaxvis, OB. the 2lst of January- 1835... 



15 

pffice, with which" he complied. Soon after, we parted, and F 
went and rcsunied the interview with the g^entleman we had 
first visited disencumbered of Mr. Jarvis. I did not see him 
again until he called at my lodgings in Washington. His call 
1 never returned, as it was early known to most oi' njy colleagues- 
that I had long belore ceased to have confidence in either Mr. 
Jarvis's political nitegrity, or his honor as a man. So much for 
his personal acquaintance. 

But I have done with him, and have only to add a few re- 
marks which in justice to the course I have adopted ought not 
to be oiiiitted. i have noticed the repeated attacks upon my- 
se^ifiof the papers wi^in Mr. Jarvis's District, understood to be 
under his own and the control of his relatives ; but they have 
excited no uneasy leelings on my part, for I know that there is- 
iBtelligence eiiough amnjig the democracy of that District to 
adjudicate justly hetween Mr. Jarvis and myself, and that they 
ecjpld not be lung- prejudiced by any abuse of me, which my 
antagonist or any ot his partisans might indulge. His conduct 
asiid miive is now known to them, in a shape which does not ad- 
mit of much misunders'anding of either. But when I saw two- 
papers out*fof the Pistrict lending themselves to extend the war,, 
and enlarge it from mostly of a personal, into that of a general 
character so as to involve the feelings of the republican party 
at large, 1 could not but believe that the managers of these 
presses would upon reflection condemn their own course, t/wot 
the motives of it, and discover that they were aiding a policy 
quite foreign to that by which alone either of them can hope to 
thrive through a course of years to come. Hence to these 1 have 
made no reply, by remonstrance or otherwise. But I have stu- 
diously avoided all attempts to enlist either the republican pa- 
pers of the State, or the members of the republican party as a 
party, to enter into my controversy with Mr. Jarvis. He pro- 
cured ex parte documents wherewith to assail me, at the moment 
I was leaving the State to be absent for months, or to enable 
others to do so ; and I at once in self-defence exposed to the 
world my relationship with him, and the motives which had 
actuated iiim towards njyself. To relieve himself from the 
force of this exposure, he has been guilty of new acts a( decep- 
tion and Jraud upon his own constituents and the public, and 
again have I exposed him to their scorn. When he shall be 
capable of a high-minded, praise-worthy or honorable act, whiclv 
will in any measure help to wipe out the stigmas which an ac- 
tumulatien of vile ones now fasten upon his name,, and ceasa 
to be the instrument of a faction in Maine, which has unsuc- 
•egsfuUy sounfht to rule, and as unsuccessfully sought to ruia, 
the Great Republican Party in Maine, then will he cease 
to be disturbed by me. FRANCIS O. J. SMITH. 

Jaauary, 1835. 



I 



f^l 



; 



II C 




•v^V' 



^-H\ 



